1.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant is permitted to delete respondent No. 4.
2.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 27.03.2002 passed by the learned Motor accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi), Kachchh at Bhuj in Misc. M.A.C.P No.646 of 1999 wherein the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.308500/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
3.0 One Razak Jusab was serving as cleaner in Truck bearing No.
G.R.O 4146. On 05..9.1998 when the said cleaner was working on the said truck, he fell down and sustained injuries. He was removed to hospital where he died. His legal heirs therefore filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the impugned award came to be passed which is challenged in the present appeal.
4.0 It is stated that application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act has not been filed and therefore the application in question be treated as final.
5.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that in the present case there was no vehicular accident, but the accident has occurred during the course of employment. He further submitted that the truck was stationary and it cannot be said that there was vehicular accident;
that the learned Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/3rd for personal living and expenses considering the age of the deceased as 20 years.
6.0 However, from the evidence on record it is clear that the deceased was cleaner in the truck and he was working on the truck. Though the truck was stationary he was on duty and he fell down from the truck and sustained injuries. Therefore the contention that it was not a vehicular accident was not accepted by the Tribunal. I am in complete agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. As regards the income and other heads are concerned, the Tribunal was justified and assigned cogent and convincing reasons and therefore no interference is warranted.
7.0 In the premises aforesaid I do not find any merits in the appeal and the same is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*